4 ms·

> But now that most code is written by LLMs Is this true? It seems to be a massive assumption.

by jacquesm 10mo ago

e-dard 10mo ago
Replace _is_ with _can be_ and I think the general point still stands.
- fmbb 10mo ago
  Sounds like just as big an assumption.
- jrflowers 10mo ago
  Replacing “is” with “can be” is in practical terms the same thing as replacing “is” with “isn’t”
embedding-shape 10mo ago
By lines of code produced in total? Probably true. By usefulness? Unclear.
fooker 10mo ago
By lines of code, almost by an order of magnitude. Some of the code is janky garbage, but that’s what most code it. There’s no use pearl clutching. Human engineering time is better spent at figuring out which problems to solve than typing code token by token. Identifying what to work on, and why, is a great research skill to have and I’m glad we are getting to realistic technology to make that a baseline skill.
- jacquesm 10mo ago
  Well, you will somehow have to turn that 'janky garbage' into quality code, who will do that then?
  - behnamoh 10mo ago
    > who will do that then? the next version of LLMs. write with GPT 5.2 now, improve the quality using 5.3 in a couple months; best of both worlds.
  - fooker 10mo ago
    For most code, this never happens in the real world. The vast majority of code is garbage, and has been for several decades.
    - bdangubic 10mo ago
      This type of comments get downvoted the most on HN but it is absolute truth, most human-written code is “subpar” (trying to be nice and not say garbage). I have been working as a contractor for many years and code I’ve seen is just… hard to put it into words. so much discussion here on HN which critiques “vibe codes” etc implies that human would have written it better which is vast vast majority is simply not the case
      - fooker 10mo ago
        I have worked on some of the most supposedly reliable codebases on earth (compilers) for several decades, and most of the code in compilers is pretty bad. And most of the code the compiler is expected to compile, seen from the perspective of fixing bugs and issues with compilers, is absolutely terrible. And the day that can be rewritten or improved reliably with AI can't come fast enough.
        jacquesm 10mo ago
        I honestly do not see how training AI on 'mountains of garbage' would have any other outcome than more garbage. I've seen lots of different codebases from the inside, some good some bad. As a rule smaller + small team = better and bigger + more participants = worse.
        simonw 10mo ago

> But now that most code is written by LLMs Is this true? It seems to be a massive assumption.

e-dard 10mo ago

Replace _is_ with _can be_ and I think the general point still stands.

fmbb 10mo ago
Sounds like just as big an assumption.
jrflowers 10mo ago
Replacing “is” with “can be” is in practical terms the same thing as replacing “is” with “isn’t”

embedding-shape 10mo ago

By lines of code produced in total? Probably true. By usefulness? Unclear.

fooker 10mo ago

By lines of code, almost by an order of magnitude. Some of the code is janky garbage, but that’s what most code it. There’s no use pearl clutching. Human engineering time is better spent at figuring out which problems to solve than typing code token by token. Identifying what to work on, and why, is a great research skill to have and I’m glad we are getting to realistic technology to make that a baseline skill.

jacquesm 10mo ago
Well, you will somehow have to turn that 'janky garbage' into quality code, who will do that then?
- behnamoh 10mo ago
  > who will do that then? the next version of LLMs. write with GPT 5.2 now, improve the quality using 5.3 in a couple months; best of both worlds.
- fooker 10mo ago
  For most code, this never happens in the real world. The vast majority of code is garbage, and has been for several decades.
  - bdangubic 10mo ago
    This type of comments get downvoted the most on HN but it is absolute truth, most human-written code is “subpar” (trying to be nice and not say garbage). I have been working as a contractor for many years and code I’ve seen is just… hard to put it into words. so much discussion here on HN which critiques “vibe codes” etc implies that human would have written it better which is vast vast majority is simply not the case
    - fooker 10mo ago
      I have worked on some of the most supposedly reliable codebases on earth (compilers) for several decades, and most of the code in compilers is pretty bad. And most of the code the compiler is expected to compile, seen from the perspective of fixing bugs and issues with compilers, is absolutely terrible. And the day that can be rewritten or improved reliably with AI can't come fast enough.
      - jacquesm 10mo ago
        I honestly do not see how training AI on 'mountains of garbage' would have any other outcome than more garbage. I've seen lots of different codebases from the inside, some good some bad. As a rule smaller + small team = better and bigger + more participants = worse.
        simonw 10mo ago